"The only morally defensible argument for keeping the name of Washington’s professional football team is that people (like me) who wish to replace “Redskins” are supposedly exaggerating the problem because of political correctness run wild.

In this view, the name’s critics are just a small group of overly vocal, overly sensitive Native Americans backed by a knee-jerk chorus of guilt-ridden, non-Indian liberals.

I don’t think the case stands up, but the argument deserves to be addressed. That’s true especially given the recent surge of interest in the topic and the team’s attempt to dismiss complaints about the name as “ludicrous.”

The strongest argument for keeping the name is that Native Americans themselves aren’t unanimous in objecting to what Indian critics call the “R-word.” "

Get the Story:
Robert McCartney: Despite Redskins’ claims, concern over name isn’t political correctness run wild (The Washington Post 2/17)

Related Stories:
Blog: A column from 1992 about offensive 'Redskins' nickname (2/15)
Column: Washington Redskins team defends use of racial slur (2/14)
Column: Finally listening to Native Americans about mascots (2/11)
Blog: Momentum builds to eliminate offensive Redskins name (2/11)
NMAI draws capacity crowd to symposium on Indian mascots (2/8)
NMAI's Indian mascot symposium tackles controversial topic (2/7)
Column: It's time to take stand against Washington Redskins (2/7)
Blog: Mayor of Washington DC refuses to use 'Redskins' name (2/6)
Agenda for symposium on Indian mascots in sports at NMAI (2/4)
Washington mayor supports elimination of 'Redskins' mascot (01/10)
Rep. Cole, Chickasaw, calls Redskins mascot 'very offensive' (01/18)